Forum:Comments - Keep or remove?
Note: A vote is of all contributors to this project, not just the admins. Please vote. Thanks. Simple vote. Keep or no? In this case, please keep discussion to a minimum - just add a quick note and put your vote. Also see the section under the vote on new forums. Keep # 22:32, September 15, 2012 (UTC) #'Sydeyc (aka NoesisM)' 00:48, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #Bloodstrider (talk) 07:11, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #idk what this is about, but comments on articles being gone makes me very sad. The topical discussion is almost half of what I like about this site. Reikkenx (talk) 07:50, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #User:Reilock The topical discussion was already discussed before. And we agreed to have comments. Don't know why is now a problem. #Where did the comments go? self explanatory results. 14:23, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #Commenting system is more useful than our petulant internet superheroes. If one stays, both should stay. Interceptor402 (talk) 19:47, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #Not sure if only wikia higher-ups can comment, but speaking from the view of a general wikia user, they are a great help for supplementary information on demand that a forum can't compare to. And does keeping it hurt anything? Megaveemon (talk) 22:01, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #We've already been through this, haven't we? The majority of the active minority wanted the comments to stay back when they were disabled as an 'experiment'. Chances are they still want the same. MuuIi (talk) 05:43, September 17, 2012 (UTC) #Why did you remove it again? Most of use wanted the comments, don't see why you are trying so hard to get rid of it. #Keep 'em. I see no point in visiting this site if there aren't any comments, it represents 75% of the reason I even click the link. #Per Aj's comment. 23:45, September 17, 2012 (UTC) #For one, keep them. For another, try to come to an agreement. Tiffy (talk) 10:46, September 18, 2012 (UTC) #It has been the one keeping the Wiki alive. the comments provide help as well as entertainment. and not to point fingers or anything, but if someone could manage the comments better, the trash comment problem can be solved rather easily. v3hemenc3 (talk) 20:07, September 18, 2012 (UTC) # Remove #Izkael (talk) 22:36, September 15, 2012 (UTC) # 22:37, September 15, 2012 (UTC) #LionsLight (talk) 12:09, September 16, 2012 (UTC) #:: The majority of the people who wanted to keep comments the last time we went through this were readers/commenters. If any userbase should be pandered to, it should be the editor-base who need Talkspaces and Recent Changes more. LionsLight (talk) 08:38, September 17, 2012 (UTC) #:::As opposed to the readers who are the ones coming to our site and recommending it to others? If we don't cater to them, there's no point in this site existing and they will go elsewhere. 11:50, September 17, 2012 (UTC) #::::And without editors, articles will slip in quality and drive away readers anyway. If you're going to bring this kind of point up, we can only reach an impasse. LionsLight (talk) 23:58, September 17, 2012 (UTC) #:::::Not at all. While comments create the illusion of less mainspace editing, the fact is that the number of content editors increases with comments. Comments allow a transition between reading and editing, and as such promote many more contributions by people who would otherwise just read. This is why I pushed for comments to be enabled here in the first place, and within the first month of them being here the wiki increased its content editors by a factor of 1.5 - growth that is continuing today, though there is no current evidence connecting it with comments. So, the actual evidence we have is that at one point, comments greatly increased mainspace editing here. According the the long-term statistics, growth is still happening, so comments obviously aren't hindering mainspace contribution. You should research your facts before telling me off. 00:07, September 18, 2012 (UTC) #::::::I can tell you as sheer statistical fact, that consistently over the past months, activity has been split from editing and commenting in a 1:9 ratio. Also, the volume of mainspace editing over a week spiked during the period when comments were disabled last month. And this is solely from memory. Please, do not tell me I haven't done research on this wiki's activity, as I am not an ignoramus like half the people propagating rumours regarding why comments were disabled. LionsLight (talk) 09:43, September 18, 2012 (UTC) #::::::Checking your statistics, the number of active, registered editors have stayed stagnant in the 70-90 region since June 2011. But mainspace editing is on a declining trend from the same time. Make of that what you will. LionsLight (talk) 09:59, September 18, 2012 (UTC) #:::::::Eh, no. Mainspace editing isn't on a decline, it's on a rise. Right now it's on a decline because of the time of year - a similar decline can be seen on just about every project at the moment. The overall trend, however, is towards an increase. What is obvious from the statistics is that an overall increase of commenters is happening, while editing is plateauing (as I said, due to time of year). If we can be increasing anything during this time, it's a good thing. 11:37, September 18, 2012 (UTC) #:::::::Wiki is almost data-complete anyway. This isn't Wikipedia, there is a finite amount of information that can concievably be added. Unless there is some major overhaul planned by Riot, or a decision to track something not yet tracked well enough (like pro teams) you're not likely to see a flurry of activity prior to Season 3. Interceptor402 (talk) 12:43, September 18, 2012 (UTC) #:::::::: If you remove the fact that Riot adds new champions and whatnot as usual, remove the fact that champions get constantly changed, and only take into account improvement of mainspace articles, how much can the edit count rise? "If we don't cater to readers, there's no point in this site existing and they will go elsewhere." That statement is only false if true implies false. What if we do cater to them? Would there still be a point in this site existing and will they not go elsewhere? Let's analyse this logically: Content worth Comment enabled N N N Y Y N Y || Y On the extreme end of the spectrum, if they are here for only comments, would it matter to them if we disable content? —BryghtShadow 00:11, October 4, 2012 (UTC) #Get dunked, get dunked Qan2211 (talk) 12:17, September 16, 2012 (UTC) # 14:14, September 16, 2012 (UTC) internet encyclopedia vs social media crossover #Zaroph (talk) 06:58, September 17, 2012 (UTC) Same point that Teh made. Would also like to point towards talk pages. # 12:12, September 17, 2012 (UTC) I've always wanted this to happen. It'll make people who only comments but do nothing go away. #—BryghtShadow 00:11, October 4, 2012 (UTC) Make use of the talk page. That's all I want as an editor. Rationale: #* If people weren't aware, each comment is a new page rather than a revision for the talk page (here's 500 deleted comment-pages). And why aren't people using the talk page? I've heard people say "I don't know how to get to it and I don't know how to edit". Should we not be ready to educate them? Or is it Oasis skin being terrible at showing you the talk page link? I want to know. Because I'll get that fixed. I'll send bug reports to Wikia. I'll do it just to get people to use the talk page. #** And what do people mean when they say "Comments": Are they talking specifically about the one below the page and not the talk page, or just a general "somewhere to post what I'm thinking of right now"? Because talk pages provide the same functionality and we can maintain it far easier! If comments weren't as complex behind the scenes for maintenance, I wouldn't be as fussed. #* "I see no point in visiting this site if there aren't any comments, it represents 75% of the reason I even click the link". If we remove comments, you can still read and post in the talk page. #* "And does keeping it hurt anything?" Actually, yes. Each comment is a new page. Renaming a page is hell. Without a bot flag, we end up spamming the recent changes with each comment moved. Spam on recent change means more hell for moderators to sift through. Unless you enjoy comments that contribute zilch to the page (I'm actually tempted to get every deleted bad comment undeleted to show the extent of "harmless" comments). Do you even see the maintenance side of this? #* From a programmer's point of view, all this would be solved by somehow making the talk page directly show up onto the page. "Don't change the what, but change the how -- Refactoring" —BryghtShadow 00:11, October 4, 2012 (UTC) # Masterx25 (talk) 08:42, October 4, 2012 (UTC) I VOTE FOR CHANGE! What's the point of a forum if no one is going to use it for discussion? And those that vote for "keep" need to provide a reasoning. Please provide a alternative in the question because right now it's biased to "keep" # Talk pages suffice. If people can't figure out how to use them, I'd reckon they aren't the type of people we want commenting. 22:25, October 4, 2012 (UTC) # Me. ~ Demise101 [[User_Talk:Demise101|'♥ Lets Talk! ♥']] [[User_Blog:Demise101|'Blogs!']] 07:43:45 ''~ Forums When Wikia releases it, the new forum extension could replace comments here. That might make the articles look nicer. See w:c:avatar for an example. 22:32, September 15, 2012 (UTC) :Step in the right direction, but not quite the perfect solution I was hoping for. Talk spaces being enabled really helps, but comments are still being set up as individual Talk pages. On a wiki with this much commenter traffic, that makes it really difficult to monitor actual Talk pages. LionsLight (talk) 10:06, September 18, 2012 (UTC)